Imagine, if you will, that a reasonably benevolent and sensible person suddenly gains the power to do miracles, on a spectacular but finite scale. (Yes to healing cancer victims, reading minds, and dispelling tornado cells; no to time travel and raising the dead, and foretelling the future.) There is no explanation for this sudden ability. She’s not willing to undergo scientific examination to explore the provenance of these powers, as she doesn’t trust anybody not to try to exploit her, and thus makes it clear that, though she’s willing to use her power to be helpful, any person who attempts to force her to submit to any experimentation against her will can expect to be turned into a gerbil and dropped into a room full of hungry cats.
An agnostic before gaining her powers, the miracle-worker remains one afterwards. When people suggest that God must have given her her powers for some particular, she replies, “Well, maybe. But wouldn’t God tell me what that purpose is? I mean, I have email and a cell phone and my number’s in the book, plus God, if God exists, is God, so he or she can surely get ahold of me if he or she wants to.” When the likes fo Pat Robertson tell her that God has sent him as her guide, she replies, “So, um, if God really talks to you, then you can probably find out the name of the guy in my 8th grade biology class I had a crush on but never told anybody about in, like, 5 seconds, right? Call me when you have an answer.” And when people suggest her power must have come from Satan, she replies, “Well, then why did I save all those people in your church from that avalanche last Tuesday? Are you saying God has it in for your church?”
When I was in college, the male half of a couple that facilitated a youth-run Bible study diagnosed a fellow student that I briefly described as claiming to be psychic, sight unseen. I guess you don’t have to have any facts when you spiritually diagnose someone. My colleague needed to be freed of demons. As simple as that.
When I mentioned the diagnosis to the fellow in question, his only response was a very non-defensive, “Well, God bless me.”
There was of course no point in sharing this with my older friend, the self-appointed prophet. I imagine that the response would have been that anyone like that who has the temerity to invoke “God’s name” has just proven how spiritually depraved he is.
I think she’d be declared “of God” or “of Satan” despite her words.
Lots of mundane things, smudges of window mist that look like the Madonna or Jesus-shaped burnt toast, are declared miraculous by believers despite their obvious mundanity.
Her protestations to her divinity would be seen as “she doesn’t know yet” or “she’s not ready to declare herself yet.” Her protestations against her Satanic nature would be seen as the Devil hiding himself.
The greatest success the Devil has had, says many believers, is convincing the world he doesn’t exist.
There sort of was a case like this. Consider the case of Apollonius of Tyana – first century AD philosopher and miracle worker. Only one life of him has come down to us (by Philostratus, writtten about a hundred years after his death. There’s evidence to support his existence – or, at any rate, to support that others well before Philostratus believed that he existed and was something like the claims, and not just a character created by Philostratus.
In the tuime of the Early Christian Church, they hated Apollodorus and condemned those who brought him into discussions – he was uncomfortably similar to Christ, both in time period and because he was a philosopher and teacher who worked miracles. In effect, they tried to ignore him.
I think that likely. It would be like how magicians like Houdini and The Amazing Randi who go out of their way to uncover fraudulent psychics and spiritualists get declared to be powerful psychics/spiritualists by some believers.
Just curious…How was this person able to do that without the ability to predict the future?
I’m thinking that the religious right might react in several different ways since they come from differing beliefs. I can’t assume that they are all anti-humanist. Probably many would see these abilities as gifts of God even if the humanist didn’t.
(Humanism does not exclude the religious.)
I admire much of Modern Humanism except its exclusion of anything psychic or what they deem “supernatural” – a term I don’t relate to. I believe that the human brain is capable of many things that science has yet to document – mainly because they happen sporatically. ( I don’t believe in the quacks I see on TV.)
Well, first of all, it’s probably a fallacy to ask what the “religious right” would do, because they’re not a monolithic organization where all the members think alike. I think it’s fair to assume that some would accuse the miracle-worker of being a witch (who’s trying to hide her evil behind good works), a not-insignificant number would similarly brand her as the Antichrist (a person who argues against the existence, or at least proof thereof, of God, with magical powers? Gotta be the Antichrist), some would take her as a prophet and hang on her every word, others would take her as the Second Coming, and still others would form a whole new religion around her.
I think the only thing we can predict for sure is that reactions to her powers and beliefs will be widely varied.
This person would be killed by someone at some time. Guaranteed. It is unfortunate, but that’s what we do to would-be messiahs.
Given the person’s failure to recognize Jeeeezus and the “Truth of Christianity”, this person would very probably be labeled The False Prophet (the Antichrist’s partner in the Book of Revelations), not necessarily The Antichrist him/herself. His/her existence would fuel a lot of Christian doomsday sub-cults, expecting the rapid rise of the Antichrist to follow on the heels of the unveiling of the False Prophet.
But you know, it’s not only the Christian Right who would have a problem with this person. Muslim Conservatives would be rioting everywhere, demanding the person convert to Islam or Die. Hardcore Athiest “realists” would be hounding the person into oblivion trying to debunk or discredit her. Insane Government Agents would want to study and dissect him, if he refused to work for them. The list is nigh endless.
1: She doesn’t insist her powers come from God, or that there is one.
2 : Such powers don’t imply there’s a God in the first place. In fact, they undercut such claims - here we have a source of miracles, without any god showing up to make speeches or claim the credit.
3 : The fact that an agnostic person, not devoted to any God can do such things undercuts the claim that miracles they supposedly performed prove that various religious figures had the divine favor that they claimed. Or if they did have divine favor, that it was because of anything special about them.
4 : If she can get powers without having to suck up to a god, in theory so could the rest of us.
5 : Changing one’s opinion on miracles because they suddenly start actually happening isn’t a violation of “realism” at all.
6 : Her abilities make an excellent stick to beat the various psychics, faith healers and other supposed miracle workers with. Hold them to HER standards, and rub their faces in how pathetic and unconvincing their parlor tricks and con games are in comparison.
Assuming she’s not a fraud, I would think this would be a setback, on balance, for materialists. Because she would definitely establish that miracles, of a sort, can happen, even though they are outside or in contradiction of the laws of nature. So one of the objections atheists always raise - “those kinds of things can’t possibly happen, and anyone who says they do is deluded” - has been refuted.
Plus, she cannot or will not give any explanation for the basis of her powers. The explanation given
seems awfully weak to me. If she is genuinely benevolent, as mentioned in the OP, why doesn’t she want to aid scientific research?
Or perhaps -
One of the ways you can tell if a theory is valid is if it makes correct predictions. Okay - suppose there was a theory that made a prediction that this kind of person would appear.
Would that not be evidence that the theory was well-founded? Not conclusive, of course, but interesting nonetheless.
Since we on the SDMB are all about following the evidence no matter where it leads.
Well, imagine it was me. I’m reasonably benevolent (when I’m not being Fabulous Creature, who as we all know would have destroyed France five minutes after mastering these powers.) In that situation, I’d be willing to help solve the global energy crisis or slow climate change. But I wouldn’t let anyone do any experiments on me, because I’ve read history books and I’d think, “Tuskegee.”
